The British royals used to do the same with the godparents being grandparents and other close relatives but they have got away from that with the queens grandchildren. Andrew is the only immediate family godparent between wales boys. Sarah and Alexandria are cousins. They tend to be family friends and family not from the immediate family.

On another board they were trying to spin the names as being a tribute to Diana and a rejection of the Windsors because George Alexander and Louis are the names of children of Diana's siblings. They also reject the idea that the names might have been chosen because they were names William and Catherine just liked.

On another board they were trying to spin the names as being a tribute to Diana and a rejection of the Windsors because George Alexander and Louis are the names of children of Diana's siblings. They also reject the idea that the names might have been chosen because they were names William and Catherine just liked.

Some of the hatred towards the Royal Family from the Diana Loyalist really disgustes me and it does more and more everyday. George and Alexander honors the Windsor Family side family. They can't Handle the fact that William is related to the Windsors and that he is close with both sides of the family (Although maybe closer to his father side now). Really it time for people's to get over it and move in! William loves both side of his family equally and is close to both. He does not feel the sane way and they always be his family whether they like it or not.

On another board they were trying to spin the names as being a tribute to Diana and a rejection of the Windsors because George Alexander and Louis are the names of children of Diana's siblings. They also reject the idea that the names might have been chosen because they were names William and Catherine just liked.

That's not the board for me
(did you mention there that the Louis was after Camilla's grandson?)

If they had wanted to remember Diana with the name, they could have used her middle name, her last name, her brother's name, her father's name...but they didn't... they just used names they liked and whatever names they would have chosen, someone would eventually have made a link with Diana.

Some of the hatred towards the Royal Family from the Diana Loyalist really disgustes me and it does more and more everyday. George and Alexander honors the Windsor Family side family. They can't Handle the fact that William is related to the Windsors and that he is close with both sides of the family (Although maybe closer to his father side now). Really it time for people's to get over it and move in! William loves both side of his family equally and is close to both. He does not feel the sane way and they always be his family whether they like it or not.

I don't even try to mess with them anymore.

I believe William and Catherine when they say they just like the names. You could make the case that it was a slight towards Diana because they didn't name him Francis and George is one of Charles's name, Alexander is the male form of one the Queen's names, and Louis is one of William's names. From what I can tell, all three names are common among British aristocracy.

I believe William and Catherine when they say they just like the names. You could make the case that it was a slight towards Diana because they didn't name him Francis and George is one of Charles's name, Alexander is the male form of one the Queen's names, and Louis is one of William's names. From what I can tell, all three names are common among British aristocracy.

Exactly, It a name they like and the names really honor someone on all side of the family (Although George mostly Windsor) But some will say that it only honors the spencers side entirely because they want it that way. They will believe and think what they want.

Exactly, It a name they like and the names really honor someone on all side of the family (Although George mostly Windsor) But some will say that it only honors the spencers side entirely because they want it that way. They will believe and think what they want.

As we have been reminded of recently, both William and Kate are very shrewd individuals. So I would venture to say they are all too aware that their son's name is comprised of the names of 3 of his Spencer cousins. My take is that perhaps both reasonings were involved. While they do like the names, and they do honor the Windsor side of the family, perhaps this is also William's way of "including his mother" in the life of his son?

As we have been reminded of recently, both William and Kate are very shrewd individuals. So I would venture to say they are all too aware that their son's name is comprised of the names of 3 of his Spencer cousins. My take is that perhaps both reasonings were involved. While they do like the names, and they do honor the Windsor side of the family, perhaps this is also William's way of "including his mother" in the life of his son?

JMO

I am not denying that William is honoring the Spencer's side for the reasons you said. I don't have a problem with that. I am talking about the Diana loyalist who want to pretend or think that it does not honors the Windsors at all and that it only honors the Spencer's side entirely because dislike of the Royal Family.

As we have been reminded of recently, both William and Kate are very shrewd individuals. So I would venture to say they are all too aware that their son's name is comprised of the names of 3 of his Spencer cousins. My take is that perhaps both reasonings were involved. While they do like the names, and they do honor the Windsor side of the family, perhaps this is also William's way of "including his mother" in the life of his son?

JMO

Possibly, but why not just say that? They are also shrewd enough to know that there are Windsor relatives with those names. William has been very upfront about wanting to keep Diana alive, which why he gave Catherine Diana's engagement ring. It's very possible that he will choose a Spencer relative as a godparent.

Possibly, but why not just say that? They are also shrewd enough to know that there are Windsor relatives with those names. William has been very upfront about wanting to keep Diana alive, which why he gave Catherine Diana's engagement ring. It's very possible that he will choose a Spencer relative as a godparent.

Why not just say that?
1) Because it's no one's business but theirs.
2) Because it's not the ultimate reason why they chose the names.
3) Because, like most people, they have many reasons to choose the names they did.
4) Because there are very likely other reasons (Mountbatton, etc.) for the name choices
5) Because part of the fun of naming a baby is letting people think about your choices rather than being overbearing and telling people what to think

Does anyone else think they might not call him George on a day to day basis? William was called Wills (and some other nicknames), Catherine was called Kate. I named my daughter Katherine (in case she wanted to use it professionally later on) but never intended to, and did not call her that.

Some royals have been called by their second names. So it remains to be seen what his day-to-day name is. The parents can take their time in deciding what it feels right to call him (and indeed, that's one of the advantages of middle and third names). In many families, not just royals, children end up being called by a different name - often a middle name - because it feels right.

5 out of the 7 children in my dad's French-Scottish family were called by names that weren't on their birth certificate. Pat was called Fanny (the actress Fanny Bryce was popular back then, and I guess Pat was a little on the dramatic side). Arthur was called Timmy and no one knows why.

Why not just say that?
1) Because it's no one's business but theirs.
2) Because it's not the ultimate reason why they chose the names.
3) Because, like most people, they have many reasons to choose the names they did.
4) Because there are very likely other reasons (Mountbatton, etc.) for the name choices
5) Because part of the fun of naming a baby is letting people think about your choices rather than being overbearing and telling people what to think

Does anyone else think they might not call him George on a day to day basis? William was called Wills (and some other nicknames), Catherine was called Kate. I named my daughter Katherine (in case she wanted to use it professionally later on) but never intended to, and did not call her that.

Some royals have been called by their second names. So it remains to be seen what his day-to-day name is. The parents can take their time in deciding what it feels right to call him (and indeed, that's one of the advantages of middle and third names). In many families, not just royals, children end up being called by a different name - often a middle name - because it feels right.

5 out of the 7 children in my dad's French-Scottish family were called by names that weren't on their birth certificate. Pat was called Fanny (the actress Fanny Bryce was popular back then, and I guess Pat was a little on the dramatic side). Arthur was called Timmy and no one knows why.

Why not just say that?
1) Because it's no one's business but theirs.
2) Because it's not the ultimate reason why they chose the names.
3) Because, like most people, they have many reasons to choose the names they did.
4) Because there are very likely other reasons (Mountbatton, etc.) for the name choices
5) Because part of the fun of naming a baby is letting people think about your choices rather than being overbearing and telling people what to think

Does anyone else think they might not call him George on a day to day basis? William was called Wills (and some other nicknames), Catherine was called Kate. I named my daughter Katherine (in case she wanted to use it professionally later on) but never intended to, and did not call her that.

Some royals have been called by their second names. So it remains to be seen what his day-to-day name is. The parents can take their time in deciding what it feels right to call him (and indeed, that's one of the advantages of middle and third names). In many families, not just royals, children end up being called by a different name - often a middle name - because it feels right.

5 out of the 7 children in my dad's French-Scottish family were called by names that weren't on their birth certificate. Pat was called Fanny (the actress Fanny Bryce was popular back then, and I guess Pat was a little on the dramatic side). Arthur was called Timmy and no one knows why.

The whole "royals being called by a name other than their given name" thing seems to have been primarily based in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, likely because there were so many individuals with the same first names.

The nicknames we have (or know) for the current royals are all based on their first names. Harry is a nickname for Henry, Wills for William, and so on. I think it's likely that if they're going to go with a name-based nickname for personal use it'll be based on George and not Alexander or Louis.

If they wanted the public to know him as anything other than George, I suspect that would have been released already. Harry - who is just about the only royal with an "official" nickname - had his nickname announced with his full name.

George doesn't really shorten to anything or has an established nickname like Henry/Harry.

I don't think the spencer cousin names really came to the forefront of W&K's minds. William doesn't appear to be that close to his Spencer cousins as he is to his Windsor ones. He may be closer to the kids of Jane and Sarah then earl spencer since his older kids grew up in South Africa and are much younger than their other Spencer cousins.

The whole "royals being called by a name other than their given name" thing seems to have been primarily based in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, likely because there were so many individuals with the same first names.

The nicknames we have (or know) for the current royals are all based on their first names. Harry is a nickname for Henry, Wills for William, and so on. I think it's likely that if they're going to go with a name-based nickname for personal use it'll be based on George and not Alexander or Louis.

If they wanted the public to know him as anything other than George, I suspect that would have been released already. Harry - who is just about the only royal with an "official" nickname - had his nickname announced with his full name.

I don't think that's how nicknames evolve, and I don't recall Wills being announced as William's nickname (nor, for that matter, a formal early announcement for Harry, either). If there was, I missed it - and would love to know about it.

I wonder if the Victorian/Edwardian era influenced my one grandmother (who was born in 1886), whose children were nearly all nicknamed. (In fact, one of the ones who wasn't nicknamed was named after a maiden aunt, and then given to the maiden aunt to raise in another state - resulting in a sort of "female junior" relationship in terms of names.)

If Kate's family intended to call Catherine "Kate" all along (and they probably did) I doubt they put that on her birth announcement. Instead, they probably discouraged people from calling her Cat, Cathy or other versions and just called her Kate or Katey. That's what we did.

Nicknames are not usually formally announced. As someone posted upthread, there are nicknames for George (although it is quite nice if they go ahead and call him George, he's a baby right now, and it's really irresistible in many cases to avoid using a sweet nickname when they're babies).

I've done a search on nicknames for people with the name George. There aren't many! One was Geo (pronounced jee-o).
Another suggested "Geordie" from a term relating to the North East of England (particularly Newcastle). Geordie came about during the Jacobite Revolution when it was declared that the people of Newcastle were staunch supporters of the Hannovarian kings, particularly George II.